Capejake72

The problem that presents itself is a paradox. Not enough fires per square mile to justify full-time, paid fire departments (and the costs of benefits, retirement, etc.)...but not so few fires that we can just count our losses and ignore the problem entirely. Your typical volunteer crew of 5 guys (or gals), 2 or 3 who have a bit of experience and a level head on their shoulders can typically handle your run-of-the-mill calls for food on the stove, a residential lock-out, or a car into the ditch. But when there is a fire every 2-3 years and that crew of 3 or 5 guys simply will not suffice. They do the best that they can and either one guy makes a good call and puts the line in the right place to make a stop...or, they chase the fire from window to window around the house until it eventually goes out (we have all seen it). Either way, the fires happen so infrequently that the public doesn't even realize that there is a problem. There were 5 fires in my town (with 3 independent departments) in 2013-2014 and all 5 of the buildings (one of which was one of the firehouse) were heavily damaged if not completely destroyed by fire.
I think there is a serious problem with the volunteer fire service (at least in my area). The chiefs, officers, and members of the fire departments are hiding their manpower shortages in an effort to protect their department's longstanding tradition. They are afraid that, if the public knows how bad things really are, then they will be uprooted from their firehouses and replaced with paid firemen. The chief will lose his spot as chief (along with his power and his car), the men will lose their "clubhouse," and the longstanding tradition of the department that they enjoy so much will be a thing of the past. They will have, in their eyes, failed as a department...
I read a lot of articles about manpower shortages or interviews with chiefs where they consistently say things like "we can always use more volunteers and manpower is low at present but we continue to respond to every alarm." To me, this means that the chief goes to every alarm and one or two guys to the firehouse during the day to get a utility or mini-attack out the door. I know of many fire departments around that "respond to every alarm" where the chiefs all sign on, then go to the firehouse, get a rig, sign that rig on as well, and they have 5 units on the road but only have 3 people (Shhhh...it's a secret!). Again, the chief is cloaking the manpower problem by saying that they never miss a response. And, to the county it looks like they have stellar responses when in fact they don't.
Another way that departments hide their manpower shortages is by saying that they have "50 members on the roster" when, in reality, only 3-5 are very active. If you look at the websites of some of these departments under the "members" section they have tremendous lists of firefighters; but half of these people haven't been seen in more than 5 years. On the department's website for my town (of which I was previously a member) there are a few people listed as members who are dead (NOT EVEN KIDDING!). So when the town supervisor or a concerned citizen looks at the website and see all those names they think everything is great, when, in reality, it is just a facade.
Lastly, I always hear chiefs in the paper saying "we averaged 15 people per alarm last year (month, week, etc.)". How many of those people are qualified interior firefighters? I know that when I was a member, the Chief would tell the fire district every month that the department "averaged 12 members per call the previous month." 4 of the 12 were fire police in their '80s who came to every call; 3-4 of the 12 were junior members; and the rest were the chiefs and a few stragglers per call. Again, this "average" number is an illusion to hide the fact that departments these days just don't cut it.
I think fire chiefs and fire departments are coming up with inventive ways to hide manpower shortages because the solution to the problem is not desirable to them. They are stalling because they think things will get better on their own (I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone say "manpower comes in waves") where, in reality, you might get a good year or two with the addition of a few good members but the fact of the matter is that manpower has been on a steady decline for years. The real solution to the problem is going to eventually be the addition of a few paid chauffeurs to get the trucks out during the day, then eventually going to full-time staffing during the day. Then the volunteers can take over at night when there are more guys around who come home from work. But, the longer the volunteer leadership can hold off the better because they get to hold on to their little men's club and the pride of 100 years of service by their organization. They don't want the intrusion of paid firefighters in their space, they don't want paid vs. volunteer battles, they don't want union issues, and they don't want to be thrown out. Firefighting is fun and those of us who love it really enjoy doing what we do. If they bring in career firefighters, the volunteers won't get to do what they love to do anymore, be firemen. So they have to hide it to hold on to their job. Hopefully, no one will have to lose their life to evince change like we see everywhere else on this job!

Back to what's wrong with the site, there are lots of good criticisms and ideas to make things better, but we are just talking amongst ourselves and none of the ideas ever seems to get to someone who can effect change.
We all know the volunteer departments are hurting, especially ems. You just have to monitor the scanner and hear the re-tones to know that. Why don't officials from local governments know what is happening? Are the Chiefs too proud to talk about the problem?
I was a volunteer for 37 years. I stared in ems when it was still Red Cross first aid training and I became one of the first EMT's in my department when that program was first introduced back in the early 70's. But over the years things have changed both with fire and ems and I don't think it is possible to balance job, family and fire/ems anymore and be truly proficient at each.
My Grandfather was Hope Hose, my father Hope Hose and Hilltop and my myself, my brothers and their sons Scarborough. I believe my nephews to be the last generation of a 100% volunteer department. We used to go out to reported fires, now departments go out for 'lock-outs'. People used to take themselves to the emergency room, now an ambulance is dispatched for a 'not feel well'. Call volumes for less than true emergencies have skyrocketed and for volunteers its a problem. You shouldn't pick and choose, but when the alarm comes in at 3:00 AM for New Dorm at Pace, you know damn well its another microwave popcorn call and you will get turned around if you even make it to the firehouse before the call is cancelled.
I know that the paid guys will say, what if it isn't the popcorn? Well that is one big difference between paid and volunteer. You are already at the station, dedicating a specific period of time to respond to calls. You are not already at your 'regular' job, getting prepared for work, taking care of children, whatever you may be doing at any time of the day or night and have to stop and go out the door to a call, 90% or more that will be unnecessary because of either our increased Nanny State mentality of our fear of legal liability for not answering a call initiated by some electronic device somewhere. Gone too are the days of the police checking it out before dispatching additional services.
So, I don't see call volume decreasing so I see increased demands on time for calls and time for training. Firefighting is a young persons job and today there are a lot more demands on young people who are dealing with getting an education and a job, starting a family and giving back the time to devote to fire/ems is more difficult. I think that it is inevitable for volunteer departments to have to transition to, initially some paid, especially days, and eventually to paid. I also feel that a County department is the answer and I don't want to hear about the law.
Change the laws if they need to be changed, Apparently you only need three people in Albany to do anything so how hard can it be. I have been in the South for almost 10 years and in both the towns I have lived in they were covered by the County for Sheriffs, Fire and EMS. The larger cities still had their own, but the rest of the towns and villages were covered by the County with a lot fewer stations and apparatus than cover Westchester. And, Palm Beach County has 30% more people and 5X the area of Westchester.
Some who haven't been around that long won't remember that the County PD used to be the Parkway PD. They embarked on an expansion and redefinition of themselves and have emerged as a major player in law enforcement.
Is there no public safety committee within the State and/or County legislatures that is willing to take on the problems in fire/ems? These are life and death issues that you would think demand some attention from our elected officials.
Oh, by the way, there is no Nirvana, my current County (Marion) department is losing personnel at an alarming rate to other City and County departments that pay better. Firefighter/Emts are making about $10-$12 dollars an hour and the local County officials refuse to address the issue because they can't find the money without raising taxes. And Palm Beach (City) is bitching that the County is poaching the City's firefighters after the City has spent the money to train them.
Let's come back this next year. Nothing will have changed. In the end, it's all politics.

As a former part-time tow truck driver, the unfortunate answer is the one I'll give you. The yellow lights used to give drivers a heads up about the dangerous situation on the side of the road, but they don't care anymore. It's the same with construction zones....no one cares anymore. It's extremely dangerous to do something as simple as changing a tire, or even dragging a disabled vehicle onto the flatbed. There are too many drivers that are either distracted or don't care.
Some cops have caught on. For a while I refused to do anything on I-684 without a trooper present. It got to the point where every time I went to the interstate a trooper was waiting for me, and would wait for me to drive away.

I hope the NYPD sends out a call to arms to ALL Uniformed personnel ( PD, FD, EMS ) to block all the roads leading up to the LODD funerals of PO Liu and PO Ramos from all politicians who are looking for another soapbox to stand on. All uniformed should stand united, arms locked and make these POS politicians try and walk the " walk of shame " through the sea of Blue. It is time to stand united!!!

This is simply a question that really can't have a finite answer. First, the ability to transport more than one patient is heavily dependent on the situation at hand and the design of your ambulance at the incident. With the current trend in ambulance design to move away from the traditional bench seat style, the ability to transport more than one pt on a backboard is not going to be possible in those designs. If backboards aren't needed, then you're going to be limited in part by the number of seating positions available.
Beyond that, the condition of the patients and number of providers that will be in the unit are going to be a big factor. If you have the seating for it, taking 3 people complaining of headaches with a single provider at a CO call may not be much of an issue, but in my opinion and experience, if one patient requires ALS treatment, you shouldn't transport a second patient regardless of condition unless you have a second provider in the back. If the second patient also requires ALS treatment, then they should be in a separate transport unit. To do otherwise, unless we're talking extraordinary circumstances necessitating it, you simply can't provide each patient the care and attention they deserve.

Ok I'm going to jump in here to try and end this crap just like I did the last time that M'Ave was getting jumped all over for apparent KoolAid consumption.....
First.... He and the other FDNY'ers on here have been critical of the Seagrave products that have been produced over the past decade due to poor build quality compared to prior generations from Seagrave as well as the poor maintenance and warranty work coupled extended repair times on the recent orders. I have read little to no Seagrave KoolAid talk from the FDNY Jakes on this board for some time. Second, some of the FDNY members posting here were open to the Ferrara purchases prior to delivery hoping for an improvement to the build quality. Alas, there was no improvement if not a regression in the quality of the rigs that were delivered from Ferrara and their opinion moved from hopeful to disappointed. No KoolAid, just experience (which I'll get to later). Finally, with the most recent order of KME rigs that have been extremely successful on the west coast the attitude was hopeful once again.... And surprise!!!! As of a few weeks ago, the KME order seemed to be getting good reviews. No KoolAid, just rigs that aren't disappointing yet.
The crux of the situation is that there are a handful of guys on this board to work for FDNY and have the experience of riding thousands (sometime over ten thousand) calls a year with a particular rig, not to mention driving it to BI, training, and other runs that aren't considered calls. They work in a relatively small geographic area that has nine times the population of the entire Provence of Nova Scotia. Hell Manhattan alone has 1.5 times the population of the Provence of Nova Scotia.... Let alone the daytime population of commuters that comes to the city. So to call these guys out and tell them that they are KoolAid drinkers is just plain silly. They don't give a damn what the brand of truck is that they're riding on as long at it doesn't break, gets to the fire, keeps them warm in the winter and cool in the summer.
Ferrara makes a very good fire truck. Its just not up to the job, in its current form, in NYC. Fact, not KoolAid.

Their is a science to fleet management and many departments have no idea about this.
What is the best time to replace a rig? Much depends on its condition, wear and tear etc. A small department that runs 300 calls a year vs. a busy one doing 10,000. etc.
But their are a number of factors to consider:
1) NFPA standards list 25 years max life, but only if the vehicle has a safety upgrade at 15 years. How many safety updates has the industry seen in the last 25 years? seatbelts, antilock breaks, automatic traction control, tilt testing, etc.? What is the liability on keeping rigs longer than this?
2) Resale value. At 10 years and 1 day the resale value of apparatus dramatically drops. Their are some large depts. that have a very progressive program to remove all rigs from primary service at 8 years and place them into the spare fleet. They are sold before their 10th year. The maintenance costs avoided, plus the resale value mean these departments actually spend less (over a 30-40 comparison) than those depts. that keep the rig until its only value is for scrap metal.
3) Maintenance Costs. Most apparatus components are covered under warranties, almost all run out by 8-10 years. The cost of maintaining older apparatus is dramatic compared to new (particularly when many costs are covered by warranties). Experience shows that in a fleet of 20 vehicles, the 2 oldest may take up to 80% of the maintenance budget. And it is not uncommon for depts. to spend 5-10%/yr. of the cost of a replacement on older apparatus. This does not take into account the down time which is hard to measure financially. As many major manufacturers have gone out of business these costs and time goes up.
4) Budget Cycle - Most depts. never set a long term replacement cycle. This creates major financial stress and causes delays in purchasing which will increase costs (particularly interest costs for bonding). If you have 100 apparatus in your fleet and you determine that the average life you want is 10 years, then every year you need to buy 10 new rigs. If you have 4 rigs and you want 20 years than every 5 years you need to buy a rig. This pattern must continue forever. If the rig ages get to close together, your costs get piled on in a very short period. If you have a steady pattern it is easier to budget and maybe even save for.
Replacement cost (average):
2 engines $500,000 each
1 ladder $1,000,000
1 Rescue $250,000
Your average is $562,500. If you buy one new rig each year you need to budget $112,500 every year (plus inflation) and you will maintain your fleet at no rig over 20. and a new rig every 5 years.

Even responding to an Emergency all apparatus must obey all V&T laws. After all what good are we doing if we are not going to make it to the scene because of an accident. Those red lights and sirens on the rigs does not give us the right to be reckless. Always and I do mean ALWAYS respond with caution. Anyone who has driven in an emergency mode knows that the lights and the noise from sirens also short circuits the public that shares the road with us.

No one is surviving long UNDER the water, however in the water with flotation is a very different story. Dive teams are more likely a recovery resource than a rescue resource in reality
http://gcaptain.com/cold_water/
The link is to an interesting article about the facts about cold water drowning and immersion in cold water, both with and without flotation. Seems like by the time a dive team is assembled, unless it just happens to be on the shore nearby, if the person has already gone under, they are likely to expire. I feel cold water rescue teams would be a resource that would be more beneficial to duplicate and have many of than dive teams, since they are more than likely doing recovery they are not necessarily needed to assemble and respond as quickly. I agree with you that it's a realistic risk in our area that we will need water rescue resources, and I agree cold water rescue units would be useful, I just don't think the dive teams are as realistic a resource to maintain for what they can actually provide. How many times is a dive team called where in reality the person isn't actually under the water and it's simply a cold water rescue? One quote that stood out from the article that struck me as pertinent to the conversation was this,
"I’m going to come right out and tell you something that almost no one in the maritime industry understands. That includes mariners, executives, managers, insurers, dock workers, for certain – fisherman, and even many (most) rescue professionals:It is impossible to die from hypothermia in cold water unless you are wearing flotation, because without flotation – you won’t live long enough to become hypothermic."
Give the article a good read, its written by a well heeled former Coast Guard member who knows his stuff, it certainly opened my eyes to a few new things.

As Dinosaur stated ...
"FDNY is sending 41 members of Special Operations Command to Buffalo to help the city after record snowfall " http://t.co/L9TYfPvXpt

Boston rarely tows illegally parked vehicles: instead they use the boot to immobilize the vehicle until the fines are paid. It is cheaper for the city (no tow trucks, no impound lots, fewer employees, etc.) but still generates lots of cash for Boston. While efficient from a revenue generation standpoint, the Boston approach fails to remedy these situations, which is why the brothers of the BFD tend to get frustrated and take matters into their own hands.

In NYC, the FDNY rarely gets to do this, because the traffic units will have it on the hook and off to the yard, long before the FD gets a call.

It has very little to do with parking.
The issue that is more important to most people is convenience.
With that, add a dose of self importance.
I have been dealing with people for the past 33 years. One thing I learned long ago was that anything a member of the public is doing, is exponentially
more important, and more immediate, than anything us mere public servants can possibly be doing.
God forbid anyone would have to walk an extra block, or circle the block once more....

Working the midnight shift in dispatch, I can tell you how easy this is to happen. There is clearly a need for some sort of SOP/SOG that requires communications with all field units, especially single man units like safety officers and fire marshals. In this day and age when we have cell phones in addition to radios and many vehicles are equipped with GPS tracking it should be fairly easy to check on someone. If I call someone on the radio and they do not answer, then call them on the phone. I would rather wake someone up over and over again than miss a injured or dead MOS. That being said, some of these units have traditionally not bothered to clear verbally when leaving a scene and that has to stop also.
I would suggest that a few things be put into place.
1) all units must report when they are clear from a scene wither by voice (recorded radio or phone) or by data (MDT/computer).
2) all single man units must be checked for status every 20 minutes, just like a MARC time for IDLH operations. However incidental communications can count for this and reset the clock.
3) If a unit fails to check in or contact can not be made at appropriate interval, attempt to contact by other means. If you can't get them by radio try the phone. Send a message to the MDT, try any and every method you have.
4) If all contact methods fail, then a unit from some agency needs to go to the last know location to make face to face contact. This could be sending a police car to check on a fire marshal or if necessary send a suppression unit back to the scene.
Eventually like with all regulations updating status will become commonplace and the alternate communications methods will be needed less and less except in true emergencies. However I personally don't care how many people it takes to make make sure everybody goes home.

From/Source: From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_State_Office_of_Mental_Retardation_and_Developmental_Disabilities_Police

Found this today, a recently painted and upfitted National Guard truck. 1 of a handful recently done for DHSES-OFPC.

Some more recent photos of mine.........
By the way, I'm desperate for invites for photo ops and very much in need of some for my happiness......message me via this board or email me at seth@EMTBravo.com ...... I'd truly appreciate it!

Austin-Travis County EMS District Command 1
2014 Ford F-350 4x4/Frazer

New Rochelle Ladder 14 (Spare)
1998 Pierce Dash 105' Ex-Ladder 13

Putnam County Medic 3 Operated By Transcare EMS
2014 Ford E-350/Wheeled Coach

Newark Ladder undergoes UL aerial testing. Note the Freedom Tower in the background

Newark NJ FD Spare
1994 E-One/Stratospear 50' Teleboom

Newark FD Truck 11
2008 American LaFrance Eagle 100'

Arlington Fire District Truck 45
E-One 100'

Westport CT Engine 4
2010 KME Severe Service Predator

Garrison VAC 32-72 2009 Ford F-450 Super Duty 4x4/Road Rescue
By the way, I'm desperate for invites for photo ops and very much in need of some for my happiness......message me via this board or email me at seth@EMTBravo.com ...... I'd truly appreciate it!

It is very dangerous to use a "standard" vac truck to rescue a trapped worker.
When we use Con Ed's trucks we have extension tubing (which also gets the vehicles noise, weight and vibration away from the trench) but of great importance it has a safety break. Without one you should never be in the trench with one...very dangerous to the victim and rescuers..
In the Rye incident, we used both Rye's and ConEd's. Rye's was on scene well ahead of all mutual aid. Was way to close to the trench and luckily it did not cause the trench to collapse.
Also Con Ed sends at least 2 trucks, because once filled its out of service till it can be dumped and depending on location this may take some time. By using the extensions the truck can be released easily to go dump. Rye's truck was pinned in, so if it needed to dump it would not be able to.

Haven't posted any of my photos on here recently, so here's some random shots I've gotten over the past couple months for y'all to enjoy....
I'm also looking to photograph any and all new Fire/PD/EMS deliveries in the Westchester/Putnam/Dutchess/Rockland/Orange/Fairfield CT areas....if you can help me by pulling out a rig to let me get photos I'd greatly appreciate it.....please PM me via this forum's messenger system, or email me at seth@emtbravo.com















I'm also looking to photograph any and all new Fire/PD/EMS deliveries in the Westchester/Putnam/Dutchess/Rockland/Orange/Fairfield CT areas....if you can help me by pulling out a rig to let me get photos I'd greatly appreciate it.....please PM me via this forum's messenger system, or email me at seth@emtbravo.com if you can help me get photos of brand new or recently delivered apparatus in the aforementioned counties.

Talk about a misleading headline! Nowhere in the article is there ANY evidence of "rampant misuse of sick time" yet it IS mentioned SEVERAL times in the article that the concern was mainly about swapping of shifts. Commissioner Finn made it clear to us that his main goal with this pilot program, scheduled to run until the middle of August 2015, was to ensure crew continuity. Prior to the start of the program you had guys doing straight tours (10/14 off, 10/14 3 off), first day back (14 off, 10/24 4 off) & 24's (24 on 48 off, 24 on 96 off). This is designed to eliminate the variances. Swaps are still allowed, only now you cannot owe more than 70 hours or else your ability to swap will be halted until you go below that threshold. I've already swapped two of my 24's this month due to family obligations, I've also paid the tours back so I'm at 0 as far as owing hours. Since sick time will still be taken in either 10 or 14 hour increments, I'm not sure how there will be any reduction in the "rampant misuse of sick time". The Globe does NOT like us as has written MANY negative articles about us. As always, consider the source.
And we DO go to work & not abuse the s*** out of the system. Do some research before you cast aspersions!

I used the codes as an old example of scripting gone bad. However I know of a dispatcher that was so into her scripts that she had hand written ones she made in training and could not even do a nightly tone test without them. The rest of us figured that we could probably get her to order a pizza over the air if we inserted the words into her scripts.
As for business names that is an uphill battle. We try to have business names stored in CAD but there is a big problem with a) names that change often or are never updated & alarms that give a different name than we have because the alarm lists the property owner and not the tenant. So going to ABC Real Estate is not at all helpful when you pull up to the local Burger King. The information is only as good as we get, and frankly we don't get very good information most of the time. In some districts they want the residence name for the same reason, some drivers know where the Smith's live as just that the Smith house, not as 1234 Farm Meadow Dr.
We had a couple of issues with giving out cross streets a few years back. Now as one of the people that helped set up of street file, we got blocks down to the smallest segment possible.
I had one FF complain that we were giving the wrong cross streets on several addresses, but every time we checked the map we were right. I finally asked him what he meant. He thought the cross streets should be specific to the side of the street the call was on, so if the only two streets on the left were a mile apart he wanted those instead of any of the six other streets on the right.
We also had a service that was adamant about getting cross streets on every call, even when you had a business name or a well known building. They were so in the habit of requesting cross streets that when going to an incident on i-95 once they asked for cross streets. A very senior dispatch supervisor from the fire department got on the air and gave them cross streets of Maine and Florida.
These are examples of why while admirable such drives for consistency often ends up removing the thinking / common sense form the process which is the exact opposite of helpful. By all means we should give out all location information we have on hand, however mandating that the map number be given before the apartment number of that the business name be given in between the cross streets is nothing more than micro managing.

There's no such thing as "ordering" people to shelter in place. It's just like a "mandatory evacuation". You won't get arrested for violating it, you're just an idiot.

Also, SRS, that word you're looking for is "rioter" not "protester." That's what you call it when people throw rocks, bottles and Molotov cocktails at Police Officers.

And if reporters are dumb enough to stand in the middle of a riot, they don't get to complain about getting hit with tear gas.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you sir. While I can respect the idea that taxpayers (voters) should have a say in their municipal services, police procedure should not be one of those areas.
Let's face it, the majority of people have little to know clue about the services they receive. So you want the civilian layperson to judge what amount of protection their police officers need?
Most people probably have no clue how many police officers even protect their communities.
Same goes for Fire and EMS (as has been beaten to death here). The majority of people have no idea what level (or lack of) fire and Ems services they are getting.
They may know there's a local firehouse or ambulance corps. Other than that, they don't know if there is paid personnel or all volunteers.
I work for a Village DPW. Do you know what the majority of residents are constantly concerned about? Garbage collection.
I have family and friends who are LEOs and I want them to come home after every shift. Therefore I want them to have any and all equipment that may give them an advantage.
Ask the residents of Newtown or Aurora if they want their Police to be as prepared as possible.
20 years ago we didn't have to think like we do today. Unfortunately we live in a different, ever changing world with an unpredictable society. It sucks, but it is reality.
I carry a firearm on an almost daily basis. I know that carrying a firearm is not my only line of defense and may not save my or my loved ones lives. However, I carry because it just may be my only line of defense. I love my life and want to stick around as long as possible.

Probably right around the time Al Sharpton became a Constitutional scholar. I'm a small government conservative myself, but lets be honest; neither stop and frisk (which used to just be called the Terry Stop) nor the DoD's surplus acquisition programs, are harming anyone's liberty.
Its the same argument that I make regarding the Second Amendment. Having a gun doesn't make you a bad guy or a tyrant, that comes from the way in which it is used.

Yes but do they have the trained personnel available to operate all of that equipment that was purchased with our grant (read tax) money?
If it sits there with no one to operate it, its useless
If it responds, but with only a small % of the personnel needed to perform the mission, its useless
and if it responds to incidents without being called, and ignores policies, procedures and ICS in general, because "nobody can stop us", its more than useless it is a danger to themselves, other responders and the community.